MAHESH CHANDRA PANDEY Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. By the instant petition, the petitioner is praying that the respondents may be directed to grant him the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman, as has been granted by this Court in the case of K.L. Asre Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another passed in WP No. 13268/2007 (s) decided on 19.01.2010.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that claiming the said benefit, the petitioner has also made a representation-Annexure P/6 before the respondent-authority, which is still pending and no order has been passed thereon so far. Therefore, the competent authority may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and decide his claim in the light of the order passed in the case of K.L. Asre (Supra).

(3.) Considering the aforesaid, this petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner- Annexure P/6 in accordance with law and if it is found that the petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman, a reasoned order be passed by the authority explaining as to why the petitioner is not found entitled to get the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman.